ORDER NO. 2 DT. 20.6.11

HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. P.K.SAMANTA, PRESIDENT

Revisionist through Mr. Debasish Bose and OP through Mr. S.P.Kar, Ld. Advocates, are present.  Heard both sides at length.  Judgement is delivered as under :-

This Revisional Application is directed against the Order dt. 14.2.11 passed by the South 24 Parganas District Consumer Forum in E.A. Case No. 15 of 2010.  The above execution case has arisen out of the judgement and order dt. 10.11.08 passed by the Forum below in Complaint Case being C.C. No. 28 of 2008.  By the said judgement the complaint petition was allowed by directing the Ops to execute and register the sale deed of the flat in question along with a direction upon the OP No. 2/Developer to pay a compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant within a month from the date of the said order.  The above revisional case has been filed by the landowner/OP.

Evidently the said landowner contested the aforesaid complaint case before the Forum below.  The aforesaid judgement and order has not been assailed by the landowner/petitioner by filing appeal before the appellate forum. While the DHr furnished one draft copy of the deed of conveyance for the purpose of execution and registration by the landowner/petitioner above named, the said landowner/petitioner has raised points as to the legality and validity of the order that was passed as above by the Forum in allowing the complaint case.  It has accordingly been recorded by the Executing Forum that the Executing Court is not the forum to challenge the legality and validity of the order, which has been put into execution.

In this Revisional Application the landowner/petitioner with much vigour has sought to argue that the order dt. 10.11.08 has been passed by the Forum below in the above complaint case without appreciating the facts and circumstances of this case and furthermore, the DHr is not entitled to get the deed of conveyance executed and registered by the landowner/petitioner on various questions of facts.  Upon careful consideration of the aforesaid contention of the landowner/petitioner we are also in agreement with the Executing Forum below that this is not the forum in which such question can be raised after disposal of the complaint case on merit.  We, therefore, do not find any illegality and/or material irregularity in the exercise of jurisdiction by the Executing Court in proceeding with the execution case for the purpose of getting the Deed of Conveyance executed and registered by the Ops.  The Revisional Application accordingly fails.  The same is, therefore, dismissed.